Okay, we’ve posted the whole card with numbers in Rotw
1. Note how the figures fit within the races. The split comes between the fifth and sixth races, and it’s big—almost 5 points. Look at the first 5, and the two one-turn dirt races that follow—to do those races at the same variant you would either have to take off significantly from the first 5, or add a bunch to the other two. See how that works out, compared to how it works out this way.
There was no weather event during the day.
2. Note that after posting the figures for Derby and Preakness day, Friedman only posted the pre-race figures this time. Anyone want to venture an opinion on why? Mine is found in number one above and the discussion here about Preakness day. If they post Belmont day they either have to explain the split, or have
a. the first 5 going really fast
b. the other 2 going really slow
c. some kind of hedge, like a slide, that gives out numbers that are only somewhat off to several races.
3. I have to wonder why the Ragozin players who came here to discuss figures haven’t requested that Friedman post that day. Tell me you’re not curious.
Jerry,
I just reviewed the Bel sheets and reread your post.
Since I know just enough about figure making methodology to be dangerous, let me put it simply that I have no clue as to what you are claiming regarding the five point shift after race 5.
I do agree that there was no apparent change weather or otherwise as I was in the crowd that day and was very cognizant of what the track supers were doing between races.
I am confused by your comparison of one turn routes to sprints. The latter part of the card was 4 turf and 2 dirt....
The Sarava # looks way off to me at first glance. I say that because the official time was extremely pedestrian and led me to believe that he probably ran the 3 1/2 to 4 1/2 and all the pair up and new top entries (i.e WE, SB, PC, Weisner, EOD, WF, ) just plain did not run.
I know you make adustments for ground loss, wind, etc. I would be interested in knowing how a 2:29.2 gets a 0 on a track that may not have been that glib but was hardly \"slow\" imo???
I admit that I did not focus my binocs on Sarava as I was searching the Throgs Neck Bridge looking for Tabitha\'s beloved Perfect Dread...lol . So I can\'t speak volumes about his trip.
I would appreciate if you could elaborate a bit on this split variant thing....
From my experience in figuremaking (I did make some crude figs back in the late 70\'s--used Kuck\'s stuff, owned one of those fig calculators, and still purchase a competitors product for pace info- obviously not Rags) During that time, I never used projections (just results versus pars which gave me a variant and then it was simple addition or subtraction)
I have a few more comments but this post is rivaling War and Peace, so I\'ll cut off right here and let you respond.
Jerry,
Part II----
Belmont Race 1)
BB, Slew, D and Parl all made 3 to 5 point new tops? With Don jumpin 4 pts as well?
Belmont Race 2) IHG makes a 5 pt jump?
Belmont race 3) SG jumps 3 1/2 pts.
PP 1/4 off lt top
PC LT top off 1 1/2 pt move
Unbrid-1/4 pt off lt top
Expect- LT top
OT------LT top
Belmont race 4) OTs--bounces 4 off top
EM---bounces 4 off top
LB---bounces 1 1/2 off recent top
SAS-bounces 3 1/4 off last
Bejio---bounces 9
This was spill race so trouble may account for this sudden bounce trend versus the Big JUMPup trend early.
Belmont race 5) JC- 16 point move = to LT top--as good as Sarava\'s Belmont and potential BC material no doubt
GS--4 1/4 pt jump = to Sarava\'s Bel-- also- Breeders Cup material no doubt
EGP--new lifetime top
Jarf--4 1/2 pt. jump
Belmont race 5) EX---matched LT top
Ent--ditto
LC---jumped 2 1/2 pts.
SN 1/4 pt off lt top.
My immediate observation is that the sprints ( 1,2 and 6) all seem to be extremely fast races with even also rans jumping up (esp race 1).
The one turn routes (345) present a problem. Races 3 and 5 have a good part of the fields jumpin way up or hitting new tops. Race 4 has everyone falling apart. Maybe race 4 was slow (relatively). Don\'t have the times and I certainly did not hand time anything or measure the gate to the timer. (I did put my finger up in the wind to check direction though {gg}).
So, 12356 have participants running faster or as fast as they ever have??
Maybe instead of making a heavier variant (the 5 point adjustment you hinted at)for the BEL, you could have left that one where it was and reduced the variant for the first 5? From my way of thinking (however convoluted that may be) that would raise the number on Sarava a few points and eliminate all the big jump up and new top efforts I see in the early races.??
I don\'t reall PG\'s Bel # nor Easy Goer\'s but I have a hard time looking at a 2:29 and change and saying the trip and track were 3 seconds & 15 lengths off those efforts. Or even 2 and 10 or even 1 and 5.
What # did Big Red run when he stopped the time in 2:24. I recall the track was souped up that day (I was there and at every Bel since Canonero II) but .....Is Sarava in his category???
I guess I agree with MB\'s post. have a hard time buying this number. How did you come up with this variant??? And this number ???
Inquiring minds would like to know?
1) The split variant is already built into the figures you see. I took off much more from the sixth and eighth—in other words, if I did the whole day at the same variant, either the first 5 races would have gotten much BETTER figures, or the other 2 would have gotten much WORSE. Look at it again, carefully—do you want to give the early races BETTER figures? Your post indicates not. Incidentally, the first 5 are basically at the same variant—the only question was whether to split off the first (add 3), and since the ones who jumped were lightly raced, fresh Frankel, Kimmel and Mott fillies, I couldn’t justify it.
2) As I said the split came between the 5th and 6th. The grass races and Belmont (2 turns) have nothing to do with the question—the 6th and 8th are the only two 1 turn races after the split.
3) The track was slow early, and got slower. I didn’t take off any extra from the Belmont—in fact, if you did it using a basic speed chart, I added significantly compared to the previous 2 dirt races. If you are comparing to Ragozin, keep in mind their numbers run about 3 points higher.
4) In terms of your horse by horse—with all due respect, you don’t understand some of the basics about figure making. For example, the second race: you have a problem with the winner going forward from his last, but he didn’t even get back to his top. And in all the cases you mention, I can’t change those figures without changing the numbers for the rest of the horses in the race. And that’s not even addressing the surrounding races—for example, to make the 3rd and 4th “work out better” for you, I would have to add to the 3rd and take off from the 4th, making the track get slower, then faster.
Look at the day again in light of the above, and note what adding or subtracting would do to all the horses in the races. If you have any more questions, please post them.
\"3. I have to wonder why the Ragozin players who came here to discuss figures haven’t requested that Friedman post that day. Tell me you’re not curious.\"
I\'m not curious.
if you\'re really so interested, I suggest offering them $1000/race, and I\'m sure they\'ll be up tomorrow.
(wait....I think len mentioned he\'d give you a discount --- 10 races for $8000)
Jerry,
Thanks for the response and your patience but I am going to test that patience a bit more.
Just to preface my next remarks, let me assure you that I use your download product and the #\'s work fine. I have made $ with your #\'s which is the ultimate bottom line to this game IMO. In my line of work, I am known as a fairly (actually my constituents would say overbearingly) analytical guy so your methodology intrigues me.
Point 1) I understand
Point 2) I understand
Point 3) If nothing was done to the Bel, then how does Sarava compare to ...say...AP Indy, Point Given, Easy Goer, Secretariat and Commendable?
Point 4) I understand your take but I am not trying to make any race fit anything or \"look better\". I just noticed that the early sprints had a lot of horses hitting new tops or jumping way up. You indicated that you used \"Basically\" the same variant for those races. Would I be correct in assuming, then, that you make slightly different variants for each race??
If that is the case, do you use a preset par time for each type of race (Gordon Pine or your own) and, then calculate individual variants and then try to tie them altogether. Or do you (as David P represented) project a par for each race based on past performance and, then, make a variant based on those projections?
That question is the essence of my confusion. I had always used (of course, this was some 25 years ago) pars based on past races in each class of race.....compared all the races after the fact and gave the track a plus or minus variant for the day and adjusted #\'s accordingly. (I did separate turf, dirt and routes and any meaningful weather related change would naturally screw up the works).
I did not massage the #\'s in Beyeresque fashion. The number was the number was the number. Crude maybe...imperfect no doubt but they provided a discernable edge at the venues I played at that time.
From what I can ascertain, you really don\'t use pars. I say this because a few months back, (in my only other posting) I asked you what par you utilized for MCL\'s at SA. I asked this for the purpose of gauging first time starter\'s chances in these races. You indicated that the par actually changes for each race? I admit that, to me, that makes little sense.
For example, if a MCL 32,000 6f has a par of 15 which is equal to 1:12 for the distance, then it is useful to know if those who have already had a few efforts have ever broken par or exhibit a pattern that threatens to do such. No?
If a bunch of plodders are entered, then I can upgrade the chances of the First timers and so on.--- (I am saving your winning numbers in these categories and am slowly evolving my own par for this purpose)
If one projects each race and uses that as \"quasi par\", then if would follow that the variants would be somewhat \'customized\'.(as they are based on an interpretation rather than a database of past races of the same class at the same track---or the traditional \"par\" as I knew it)) It would also follow that each # was somewhat \'customized\'. This, of course, would also imply that future \'quasi pars\' would be based upon these customized numbers and so on and so on.
Jerry, as I prefaced, whichever way you do your numbers, they work. I realize you are probably shaking your head and laughing at where this lunatic is going with all this but I am trying to grasp the basics of how you make figures as I feel that will better enable me to use them effectively.
Thanks again
Bob
Exactly--why would anyone care, right? In fact, that\'s why they posted them for Derby and Preakness day--because no-one cares! And they didn\'t do it now because they forgot! And no-one is smart enough to understand that but you!
It\'s worth as much to me to have them obviously back down in public as it is to have them post it. And it\'s worth more to see you pretend it doesn\'t matter.
What\'s the prize for correctly pegging when the variant split? I said around the 4th or 5th race. HP
3) When I say nothing was done to the Belmont, I mean I didn’t subtract anything extra—the race got the figure it did because of the speed (or slowness) of the track. If you remember your speed chart you might recall that if a track gets slower, the effect in raw time is more dramatic as the distances get longer. The track was very slow on Belmont Day (Explicit got a negative number for shading 1:10) and the effect was magnified on the mile and a half race.
I wasn’t making figures when Secretariat ran. Sarava ran worse than Easy Goer and Point Given, better than A.P. Indy (wildly overrated) and Commendable. In general, as I’ve said countless times, race horses are getting better.
4) Like Ragozin and Beyer I make slight adjustments to each race. All other issues aside, teletimer and hand times aren’t perfectly accurate, and wind changes speed and direction during a race, so even if the track speed is unchanged you make small adjustments to each race based on the horses—in this case the track was the same 1 to 5, and my adds and subtracts were up to ¾ of a point, which is less than usual, if anything.
No, we do not use a “par time” for all types of races. When you start making your data base you use older horse claiming races for pars, because they are more predictable, but once you get even a reasonably solid data base you make your figures using the previous figure histories of the horses—it gives you way more “data points” (like 80 a day) to use than just using the winners of 3 or 4 races.
What I do when I approach a day is to start by going through quickly, taking each race on it’s own, to see if there is an obvious variant (or 2 possible choices) that make that race look really good. If there isn’t, I skip it, and go to the next one. After my first pass I usually have corrections over about half the races, and the day starts to take shape—the 2 routes might be within a point, so I’ll look at that variant for the third one, the sprints might have moved 4 points from the first to the last, so I’ll look at the middle races in that light, etc.
\"It\'s worth as much to me to have them obviously back down in public as it is to have them post it. And it\'s worth more to see you pretend it doesn\'t matter.\"
then maybe you should offer them a thousand per racew to leave them down.....
Whatever the hell it is, you wouldn\'t get it for \"around the 4th or 5th race\". It\'s a split, not a slide.
Uhh... I don\'t have to, do I? All I have to do is make it obvious that they are backing down because it\'s less painful than posting the day--sort of like when they didn\'t respond to the public posting of my lawyer\'s letter. Don\'t stop--you\'re winning, and Ragozin, Jake and Friedman want to thank you.
I...damn. -HP
don\'t curse --- jerry doesn\'t like that.
\"All I have to do is make it obvious that they are backing down because it\'s less painful than posting the day--sort of like when they didn\'t respond to the public posting of my lawyer\'s letter.\"
sort of like when you backed down from the contest...
and also when backed down about the infamous \"letter\".
Jerry, JR.
JB,
I think you got your request answered, they
posted the BEL Day figs.
Nunzio
Again, you\'re much cleverer than all those idiots who understand why I didn\'t get involved. And being clever is so impressive--the only thing I don\'t get is why no-one (well, except the other genius) jumps in on your side on any of these issues. After all, lots of Raggies do come here--maybe you\'re just too good for this audience.
\"...the only thing I don\'t get is why no-one (well, except the other genius) jumps in on your side on any of these issues.\"
Thanks Pops - genius runs in the family I guess.
Sure hope paranoia and insecurity doesn\'t.
Jerry, JR.
No Nunzio, they have not. Only for the BStakes. HP
HP,
Sorry, I thought when they posted 6/15 BEL in the thread they were putting them up.
Did you see Street Cry dismantle the
Steven Foster field ? That was as impressive
a performance as I have seen in some time.
Nunzio
Unless you found something we can\'t, it\'s the day without the figures they ran. Which is an amazing concept--give your customers something they have already paid for. And an admission that they don\'t want to be subject to the same kind of scrutiny they were exposed to after the B.C. and preakness. Why else not post them?
JB,
Sorry for the false alarm, I saw a post labeled BEL 6/15 & I just assummed thats
what it was. My bad.
Nunzio
I saw it. Only the amazing Victory Gallop stopped him from getting the Stakes Record Time.
Now why is it that Baffert can\'t get his horses to run in that race, which happens to be in Kentucky? Not the first time. I would be curious, Mr. Jerry \"it\'s Baffert in Kentucky\" Brown.
That is, if you\'re not too busy with the mental giants from Rag-ville.
By the way, it would be nice if you would credit my amazing empirical observations with enabling you to see where to split the variant on Belmont day, even if you\'re not giving me any prize. And don\'t forget, I\'m the one who said, \"it\'s a split, not a slide, based on the rate of moisture evaporation in the shadows from the grandstand on the shaded part of the track.\" I said it while I was drinking, so maybe you didn\'t hear me. Other people heard me and told me to shut up.
But of course, you\'re not giving me any credit on the horses I told you to buy either. I also tried to call and wake you up for that $60,000 tri that Ragozin recounts in his great book, but Len Friedman climbed a telephone pole outside of your apartment and cut the wires. Not many people know that part of the story.
HP
Maybe a bit too impressive? Bailey got on Victory Gallop for this race, set a track record, and the horse could only go through the torture one more time. Guided Tour also ran huge in this race, and I think he only ran one more big one afterwards. Bailey has been known to get a bit overzealous in the Pacific Classic, I just hope the horse is alive come October. (just a bitter word from a guy who had a $1,000 KYD futures bet on SC last year, 25-1).
Actually, I didn\'t hear you because I was drinking. That was Friedman? Listen, when you\'re done making things up with your wife I could use the kneepads back.
That whole thing is over and done with. Cash makes kneepads unnecessary. What does she care where it comes from? Live and learn. I did it on purpose so you would have something to talk about.
HP
I wish I could somehow get some money down on a Sarava vs Indy mile and a half race. Indy would have collared Sarava by the far turn, and definitely would have covered the last quarter in less than 26 seconds. He would have won that race by at least 5 lengths. I think Neil \"no train\" Drysdale confused you a bit. They knew what they had in terms of breeding value, and never pushed the horse. He did stretch his legs, however, in the Belmont, and must have run a better figure than Sarava.....MUST HAVE!!
Also, obvious question, why did you have the kneepads in the first place? HP
On a related subject, Chris just got back. She said she didn\'t sleep much the last night she was in Syria, because she was sleeping on a roof in this village and a donkey kept braying.
Okay, enough chit chat--no more posts that aren\'t angry.
Was it the same donkey that\'s been doing all the braying on this board????